These "subtle" changes like the disk numbering not changing but the partition numbering changing, plus "set root" rather than "root" and "linux"rather than "kernel" are not at all difficult to do but why oh why did the developers make it just that little bit more troublesome.

Thank you for sharing your experience with Grub2. Looking back over mine, the puppy code seems the same, although I put all my pups in one file in the same location that you used instead of separate files. Looking at the grub.cfg after running sudo update-grub showed my pup code, but grub kept giving errors.

Maybe they've made some changes from the alpha's that I was trying to use. Your success encourages me to try again. I do think that Grub2 is the wave of the future, especially with puppy which stays ahead of the major distributions in many ways.

Jim, remember that I am a grub2 "expert" of only a few hours but if you want to give your code that's in your /etc/grub.d/41_puppy file (or whatever it's called) and the relevant bit of grub.cfg I'll be happy to compare with mine. Might be worth a try?

My grub2 came with the final version of Ubuntu 9.10 released Thursday. Where did yours come from?

Also not too sure I understand this?

Quote:

although I put all my pups in one file in the same location that you used instead of separate files

My Puppys are all in the same partition but each one in a separate directory including the pup_save files. You might want to try that configuration if all else fails.

Jim1911.
My grub2 came with the final version of Ubuntu 9.10 released Thursday. Where did yours come from?
Also not too sure I understand this?

Quote:

although I put all my pups in one file in the same location that you used instead of separate files

My Puppys are all in the same partition but each one in a separate directory including the pup_save files.

I was using one of the alpha versions of Ubuntu 9.10 back in August.

The code (sample below) I used in the 40_puppy file is very similar to yours except I included about 6 pups each in their own psubdir and some were on different partitions. I used the same directory location and commands that you used to make the file executable and update the grub. However, kept getting errors. Hopefully the final release of Grub2 has improved. For now, I am sticking with ubuntu 9.04 for awhile longer. Also boot Kubuntu 9.10 and Windows Vista using Grub 0.97. Of course Grub2 recognized those fine.

Mike, I think I am right in saying one needs Grub 2 for ext4 support, which is absent in Grub 1

Jim1911 wrote

Quote:

I am using Grub 1 and it supports a number of ext4 partitions without any problems.

AIUI both are sort of correct. As mikeb has said before what is now becoming know as Grub-1 or Grub legacy hasn't been officially supported for a while. Until recently grub (versions 0.9X) didn't support ext4 (and most puppies use this version of grub.) But there have been (unofficial?) patches to grub to allow use of ext4. I understand Puppy 431 uses this.

I have been more than happy using Grub Legacy, until this week, for multi-booting but if I have to jump to another system I think it's a good time to do it now using Ubuntu 9.10

Apart from official support for ext4, and of course the fact that it's being actively developed, it does seem to be better at detecting other distros and for those who want it (not me) it will allow nice and pretty boot-splash screens.

But just as with Grub legacy, it didn't recognise any puppy nor TinyCore Linux.

I'd have a look at Grub4dos but I'm unsure of one thing. Can I use it on a pc that doesn't have any trace of MS ie no Dos or Windows installed at all? mikeb perhaps you could kindly confirm? But there again I might only be holding off grub-2 for a while as perhaps grub4dos will be "embracing" the grub2 way soon?

I'd have a look at Grub4dos but I'm unsure of one thing. Can I use it on a pc that doesn't have any trace of MS ie no Dos or Windows installed at all? mikeb perhaps you could kindly confirm? But there again I might only be holding off grub-2 for a while as perhaps grub4dos will be "embracing" the grub2 way soon?

in the grub4dos package there is bootlace.com

bootlace.com /dev/sda (it can be run from dos too!)

will write to the mbr so that grldr is booted so basically running just like normal grub (but on more file system types)..this is how I use it now and use chainloader for windows (bootsector is unaffected or chainload ntldr directly)

so ...bootlace, grldr to (any) partition root, make yer menu.lst...done

so ...bootlace, grldr to (any) partition root, make yer menu.lst...done

my experience, grldr to an ext4 partition fails.
if the grldr on any other (ntfs/vfat/ext2/etx3) partiton, it can boot up Linux or Windows from any partion including ext4.Last edited by shinobar on Sun 01 Nov 2009, 09:17; edited 1 time in total

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum